Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-4ws75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-12T16:39:05.679Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Seasonal shift of dominance in a submerged rooted macrophyte community of Lake Balaton

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2011

Viktor R. Tóth  and
Sándor Herodek
Viktor R. Tóth*
Affiliation:
Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Balaton Limnological Research Institute, Klebelsberg Kuno út 3., 8237 Tihany, Hungary
Sándor Herodek*
Affiliation:
Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Balaton Limnological Research Institute, Klebelsberg Kuno út 3., 8237 Tihany, Hungary
*
Corresponding authors: donvito@tres.blki.hu, herodek@tres.blki.hu
Corresponding authors: donvito@tres.blki.hu, herodek@tres.blki.hu
Get access

Abstract

Abiotic heterogeneity of the littoral zone of Lake Balaton influences both horizontal and vertical distribution of macrophytes, but biotic differences could shape the nature of a community. Vertical and temporal (small timescale) biomass distributions of Potamogeton perfoliatus and Myriophyllum spicatum were analysed in relation to their photosynthetic capacities to understand their coexistence, general presence over the northern shore of the lake seasonal shift of dominance within the community.

Our results indicated the adaptation of these macrophytes to the rapidly changing and mostly low irradiance of the Lake Balaton originated from its high turbidity: both P. perfoliatus and M. spicatum had high photosynthetic activity (20 to 50 mg O2.g drw−1.h−1), low dark respiration (around 12–14% of maximal photosynthetic capacity) and high shade tolerance (Ic of plants were 29±18 and 26±18 μmol.m−2.s−1, respectively). The majority of photosynthetic parameters had no (or little) seasonal changes. On the other hand, in Lake Balaton P. perfoliatus and M. spicatum differed in vertical distribution of biomass: Myriophyllum concentrated its biomass in the upper, well-lit region of the water more strongly than the Potamogeton.

Results suggest that the autogenic shift of dominance from Potamogeton to Myriophyllum in Lake Balaton can't be explained only by seasonal patterns of photophysiological changes, but supported by constitutive differences in plants architecture could led to the described phenomena.

Keywords

Lightbiomass distributionphotosynthesisPotamogeton perfoliatusMyriophyllum spicatum

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Annales de Limnologie - International Journal of Limnology , Volume 47 , Issue 2 , 2011 , pp. 141 - 150
Copyright
© EDP Sciences, 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abernethy, V.J., Sabbatini, M.R. and Murphy, K.J., 1996. Response of Elodea canadensis Michx, and Myriophyllum spicatum L. to shade, cutting and competition in experimental culture. Hydrobiologia, 340, 219–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agami, M. and Waisel, Y., 1985. Inter-relationships between Najas marina L. and three other species of aquatic macrophytes. Hydrobiologia, 126, 169–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agami, M. and Waisel, Y., 2002. Competitive relationships between two water plant species: Najas marina L. and Myriophyllum spicatum L. Hydrobiologia, 482, 197–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asaeda, T., Sultana, M., Manatunge, J. and Fujino, T., 2004. The effect of epiphytic algae on the growth and production of Potamogeton perfoliatus L. in two light conditions. Environ. Exp. Bot., 52, 225–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baattrup-Pedersen, A., Larsen, S.E. and Riis, T., 2003. Composition and richness of macrophyte communities in small Danish streams-influence of environmental factors and weed cutting. Hydrobiologia, 495, 171–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baier, T. and Neuwirth, E., 2007. Excel :: COM :: R. Computation. Stat., 22, 91–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barko, J., Hardin, D.G. and Matthews, M.S., 1982. Growth and morphology of submersed freshwater macrophytes in relation to light and temperature. Can. J. Bot., 60, 877–887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrat-Segretain, M.H., 2004. Growth of Elodea canadensis and Elodea nuttallii in monocultures and mixture under different light and nutrient conditions. Arch. Hydrobiol., 161, 133–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrat-Segretain, M.H. and Amoros, C., 1996. Recolonization of cleared riverine macrophyte patches: importance of the border effect. J. Veg. Sci., 7, 769–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bassow, S.L. and Bazzaz, F.A., 1997. Intra-and inter-specific variation in canopy photosynthesis in a mixed deciduous forest. Oecologia, 109, 507–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonis, A. and Grillas, P., 2002. Deposition, germination and spatio-temporal patterns of charophyte propagule banks: a review. Aquat. Bot., 72, 235–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowes, G. and Salvucci, M.E., 1989. Plasticity in the photosynthetic carbon metabolism of submersed aquatic macrophytes. Aquat. Bot., 34, 233–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caffrey, J.M. and Kemp, W.M., 1991. Seasonal and spatial patterns of oxygen production, respiration and root-rhizome release in Potamogeton perfoliatus L. and Zostera marina L. Aquat. Bot., 40, 109–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cenzato, D. and Ganf, G., 2001. A comparison of growth responses between two species of Potamogeton with contrasting canopy architecture. Aquat. Bot., 70, 53–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, P. and Prepas, E., 1990. Competition and coexistence in submerged aquatic plant communities: the effects of species interactions versus abiotic factors. Freshwater Biol., 23, 541–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, B.C. and Fourqurean, J.W., 2001. Competition between the tropical alga, Halimeda incrassata, and the seagrass, Thalassia testudinum. Aquat. Bot., 71, 217–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dring, M.J., 1991. The biology of marine plants, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duarte, C.M., 1991. Seagrass depth limits. Aquat. Bot., 40, 363–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duarte, C.M. and Kalf, J., 1986. Littoral slope as a predictor of the maximum biomass of submerged macrophyte communities. Limnol. Oceanogr., 31, 1072–1080.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, S.G., Gray, L.J., Grimm, N.B. and Busch, D.E., 1982. Temporal succession in a desert stream ecosystem following flash flooding. Ecol. Monogr., 52, 93–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldsborough, W.J. and Kemp, W.M., 1988. Light responses of a submersed macrophyte: implications for survival in turbid tidal waters. Ecology, 69, 1775–1786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutschick, V., 1999. Biotic and abiotic consequences of differences in leaf structure. New Phytol., 143, 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harley, M.T. and Findlay, S., 1994. Photosynthesis-irradiance relationships for three species of submersed macrophytes in the tidal freshwater Hudson River. Estuar. Coasts, 17, 200–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kemp, W.M., Boynton, W.R., Cunningham, J.J., Stevenson, J.C., Jones, T.W. and Means, J.C., 1985. Effects of atrazine and linuron on photosynthesis and growth of the macrophytes, Potamogeton perfoliatus L. and Myriophyllum spicatum L. in an estuarine environment. Mar. Environ. Res., 16, 255–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madsen, J.D., Hartleb, C.F. and Boylen, C.W., 1991. Photosynthetic characteristics of Myriophyllum spicatum and six submersed aquatic macrophyte species native to Lake George, New York. Freshwater Biol., 26, 233–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCreary, N.J., 1991. Competition as a mechanism of submersed macrophyte community structure. Aquat. Bot., 41, 177–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Platt, T., Gallegos, C.L. and Harrison, W.G., 1980. Photoinhibition of photosynthesis in natural assemblages of marine phytoplankton. J. Mar. Res., 38, 687–701.Google Scholar
Rae, R., Hanelt, D. and Hawes, I., 2001. Sensitivity of freshwater macrophytes to UV radiation. Mar. Freshwater Res., 52, 1023–1032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roxburgh, S.H., Shea, K. and Wilson, J.B., 2004. The intermediate disturbance hypothesis: patch dynamics and mechanisms of species coexistence. Ecology, 85, 359–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Titus, J.E. and Adams, M.S., 1979. Coexistence and the comparative light relations of the submersed macrophytes Myriophyllum spicatum L. and Vallisneria americana Michx. Oecologia, 40, 273–286.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Titus, J.E. and Stone, W.H., 1982. Photosynthetic response of two submersed macrophytes to dissolved inorganic carbon concentration and pH. Limnol. Oceanogr., 27, 151–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torres Boeger, M.R.T. and Poulson, M.E., 2003. Morphological adaptations and photosynthetic rates of amphibious Veronica anagallis-aquatica L. (Scrophulariaceae) under different flow regimes. Aquat. Bot., 75, 123–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tóth, V.R. and Herodek, S., 2009. A simple incubation tank for photosynthesis measurements with six light intensities. Ann. Limnol. - Int. J. Lim., 45, 195–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van, T.K., Wheeler, G.S. and Center, T.D., 1999. Competition between Hydrilla verticillata and Vallisneria americana as influenced by soil fertility. Aquat. Bot., 62, 225–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar